I've not seen many of the films nominated, but I have seen Lincoln and Argo (as well as Django).

Of those Lincoln basically revolves around one great performance, so Daniel Day Lewis will no doubt win best actor, but otherwise the film was far too slow for my tastes as a viewer. It suffers from exactly the same problem as Argo in that as a historical drama you know full well the outcome from the moment you start watching, so tension is hard to build.

Argo was both brilliant and awful in equal measure. It was more enjoyable to watch, with a more enthralling story that took a few decent twists and turns, though again we all knew the outcome. It's hard to see past the horrible historical inaccuracies, blatant anti Iranian propaganda and one sided pro CIA story telling, and utterly wooden performances from the majority of the cast (Goodman and Arkin aside) though. I would be really disappointed to see this win best film, though Arkin has a good shot at best supporting actor.

Django was by far my favourite of the three, but as we all know being popular with the public and more watchable means nothing with these awards. I'd be utterly stunned if it won a major award, even though many feel Tarantino is one of the best directors around and deserves some credit. His films are just too controversial to win though. Waltz won't win this time, the role is too similar to his part in Inglorious.

At 2/23/13 10:18 AM, squidly wrote:
Anne Hathaway better get best supporting actress for her perfromance in Les Mis.

It'd also be awesome if Les Mis gets best picture.

I swear to god, though, if that super Oscar Bait piece of crap Lincoln gets it...

So in your mind the 18th century French musical with an allstar cast is something other than oscar bait? Don't get me wrong here. I like Les Mis. I have never seen this version and I don't plan to. But you have Anne Hathaway playing a prostitute who cuts her hair and sings. All this in a year where no one played a Nazi.

I have nothing against people who can use pot and lead a productive life. It's these sanctimonius hippies that make me wish I was a riot cop in the 60's

At 2/23/13 10:18 AM, squidly wrote:
Anne Hathaway better get best supporting actress for her perfromance in Les Mis.

It'd also be awesome if Les Mis gets best picture.

I swear to god, though, if that super Oscar Bait piece of crap Lincoln gets it...

So in your mind the 18th century French musical with an allstar cast is something other than oscar bait? Don't get me wrong here. I like Les Mis. I have never seen this version and I don't plan to. But you have Anne Hathaway playing a prostitute who cuts her hair and sings. All this in a year where no one played a Nazi.

Well, I like to think of it as an inevitable good rendition of a very good musical.

And uh, Les Mis: The Musical was written in 1980. It would truly be Oscar Bait if it were a direct adaptation of the book.

I've had this argument before, and while it may be oscar bait, it definitely rises above for the fact that all the actors, even the extras, constantly challenge themselves in some rather ridiculously far-fetched roles (Hugh Jackman and Russel Crowe SINGING) and the ones who really stole the show are the unsung heroes - the ensemble was perfectly casted.

I think it really was just a well put together movie, though I understand the budget and the three big names (in a sea of talented nobodies, may I add) make it Oscar Bait.

It is still a good movie, and it still deserves every bit of praise it gets.

My only complaint was that the beginning was rather slow, some things in musicals on stage DO NOT translate to movies, that's why the beginning scenes just seemed to drag - how long is Hugh Jackman going to be on that altar trying to become a new man?

The movie really picks up during the second act, which I believe is possibly one of the best acts in musical history.

Props to the fact they didn't pick an "easy" musical, this is an extremely difficult and unforgiving musical which is almost entirely sung through and has a "miss the beat-lose the everything" tolerance, and the fact that these "spoiled movie actors" got it right and SANG ON CAMERA makes it just a wonderful achievement.

And uh, Les Mis: The Musical was written in 1980. It would truly be Oscar Bait if it were a direct adaptation of the book.

I don't know you from Adam but I'm picturing the worst kind of theater snob starting that correction with "And, uh" then flipping your scarf

I've had this argument before, and while it may be oscar bait, it definitely rises above for the fact that all the actors, even the extras, constantly challenge themselves in some rather ridiculously far-fetched roles (Hugh Jackman and Russel Crowe SINGING) and the ones who really stole the show are the unsung heroes - the ensemble was perfectly casted.

Russel Crow has a band and Hugh Jackman comes from a musical theater background. You are way too high on knowing stuff to not know that.

I think it really was just a well put together movie, though I understand the budget and the three big names (in a sea of talented nobodies, may I add) make it Oscar Bait.

It is still a good movie, and it still deserves every bit of praise it gets.

If you like the movie go right ahead. I like my share of schlock.

I have nothing against people who can use pot and lead a productive life. It's these sanctimonius hippies that make me wish I was a riot cop in the 60's

I think "Argo" is probably going to win Best Picture. I don't care much about the other categories, because there are a seemingly infinite number of people who are going to win them, much less the nominated ones. I have been looking through movies that were good examples of "tropes" and I can't seem to find any released this year that are Oscar nominated for Best Picture.

You know the world's gone crazy when the best rapper's a white guy and the best golfer's a black guy - Chris Rock